View Full Version : Parking ticket scammers
STRAMASHER
05-02-09, 10:40 AM
Friend of mine just got a letter from one of these Private Car Parking mobs saying to pay £60 fine from back in October at a well known large busy shopping mall in Glasgow.
My friend was on his motorcycle and had parked at the metal loops for 5-10mins as he had done on many occassions before, where employees parked their bikes /bicycles and scooters before he had noted.
Returns to bike to find two of these guys finishing writing a ticket and telling my mate "Its changed" and he should of parked in a car space!!! (endearing himself further to the car driving majority then!) or in specific bike parking. (A former disabled bay ((tough **** eh?:rolleyes:) hidden behind a hedge and no signs visible from the road). Further, "Bike exhausts are hot, so its a Health&Safety issue." he was told. There was a small sign miles up on the wall covering the 50m of ground anchor thingies.
So an injustice he thought, so argued his various points reasonably and respectfully in a pleasent manner and eventually refused the ticket.
February letter , he has told me, informs him , as he is the registered keeper of the vehicle reported, (DVLA sell this info nowadays) to pay up in 2weeks or it goes (sold) to a debt collecting agency.
He now has a dilema of paying up to these crooks or completely ignoring all of it in its entirity as they need to prove it was him "driving" to "get" him for "breach of contract" with the parking company.
Can they "blacklist you/CCJ" before they take you to court?
Anybody had any experiences with these Private scammers? In Scotland (variances in law?!)
Loads of stories on the net he said, but little with actual outcomes.
Trying to help out a mate.
Cheers
timwilky
05-02-09, 10:47 AM
I would advise your friend to take it to court, most enforcement orders come out of a default by not defending it before the court.
You cannot be fined by a private company, they only have the ability to issue a penalty by virtue that by parking on private land you entered into a contract to park and broke the terms of the contract.
Penalties cannot be punitive, they must represent the financial loss brought about by breach of contract. Nobody can say a store lost £60 because you parked in the wrong place.
fight it. but do not ignore it or they win by default and costs get huge every time they fail to collect.
Can they "blacklist you/CCJ" before they take you to court?
Yes / No
Yes they could record a default against you on your credit file.
No, how could they possibly give you a County Court Judgement without taking you to court? :roll:
Yes / No
Yes they could record a default against you on your credit file.
No, how could they possibly give you a County Court Judgement without taking you to court? :roll:
I think you're thinking of a Consumer Credit Act Notice of Default. Answer - no, it's not CCA-regulated.
I'd go to Court.
New Leaf
05-02-09, 10:59 AM
I'd go to Court.
Does he have to wait for them to take him to court, by which time the £60 charge will no doubt have turned into £60,000,000 with fees from the debt collection agency.
Or can he pre-emp all of that and take it to court himself straight away, before the stakes get too big?
I'd fight a £60 fine, but if not paying and waiting for them to take court action results in the charge going up and up then it will cause him a whole loads of stress and he might end up having to pay much more.
The Guru
05-02-09, 11:03 AM
Should such letters not be sent to you recorder delivery? What if you never actually get the letter?
The Guru
05-02-09, 11:05 AM
...I'd fight a £60 fine, but if not paying and waiting for them to take court action results in the charge going up and up then it will cause him a whole loads of stress and he might end up having to pay much more.
But how can they even justify £60?
Gazza77
05-02-09, 11:09 AM
I think you're thinking of a Consumer Credit Act Notice of Default. Answer - no, it's not CCA-regulated.
I'd go to Court.
+1.
New Leaf - yes the collection agency will add their whack. Just refuse to deal with them and either (a) they'll give up or b) they'll issue proceedings. If (a) all well and good. If (b), the charges are every bit as unenforceable as the 'fine'.
I think you're thinking of a Consumer Credit Act Notice of Default. Answer - no, it's not CCA-regulated.
I'd go to Court.
I don't understand bold bit.
and how can you go to court if they don't send you a summons? should you issue a summons saying they are unfairly hassling you?
Flamin_Squirrel
05-02-09, 12:52 PM
New Leaf - yes the collection agency will add their whack. Just refuse to deal with them and either (a) they'll give up or b) they'll issue proceedings. If (a) all well and good. If (b), the charges are every bit as unenforceable as the 'fine'.
Surely what they're doing is extortion? Why is it allowed? I'm guessing because they can't stop private companies doing it while councils do it as a matter of course. :mad:
See this all the time.
More of a harrasment thing. They charge and many people will jsut pay. I've known so many people to get a letter saying they owe xyz or go to court in 2 weeks.
It gets binned, they never hear anything again.
timwilky
05-02-09, 01:10 PM
I had to laugh, in the run up to christmas my local asda were enforcing the disabled parking with tickets. One guy issuing tickets, two security guards to stop him getting thumped.
Big sign up on customer services to say the parking tickets were nothing to do with the store.
I don't understand bold bit.
and how can you go to court if they don't send you a summons? should you issue a summons saying they are unfairly hassling you?
Stu - you can't get adverse debt entries registered before you go to Court unless the debt is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act. Under the Act, if you miss a payment, a lender can register a 'Notice of Default'. If the matter is not CCA regulated - like this - then they can't do that.
So, all they can do is sue you. They have to prove that you were the driver. There is no obligation on the registered keeper to identify the driver - this is not a s172 Road Traffic Act matter where the police can require the RK to identify the driver. And unless they have CCTV evidence, that is going to be very difficult. They have to prove it on the balance of probabilities, so at least 51/49, and how can they prove anything without evidence?
Let's assume that they do identify you and have shown therefore that they are suing the correct person. These issues are a simple contract matter. They will say that the signage was the terms of a contract. So, they will have to show that the signage did do that, and that they took adequate steps to draw the signage to the driver's attention. Whether they did or not is a matter of fact, so the answer is to go take photos of the signs so you can say that the signs were not within normal field of vision, and then set out the facts (assuming that they were placed awkwardly where nobody would see them) in the defence document.
This is small claims litigation, so no legal expenses allowed - even if they win, all they recover is the Court issue fee, and witness expenses in accordance with the Court scales. If the 'penalty' - and there are additional issues about the enforceability of 'penalties' in contract law, you can't charge 'penalties', the amount has to be a reasonable assessment of loss, not a penalty, so there's a further defence - fails because of inadequate signage, then debt collection agency costs will fail too.
It goes without saying that this is a long drawn out process and it's most unlikely that the landowner would sue. Some will, of course - there is no guarantee. Intimidation is by far the best tactic on the basis that around 50% of people will pay up without them having to do anything. I've nevver acted for anyone whio's been sued on this basis, but that's just my (limited) experience. if the parking people think they are justified, then they might well have a pop. And, when a Claim Form arrives from the Court, a lot more people will pay up because they feel intimidated by going to court.
If threatening letters keep arriving, the best thing to do is to reply, making no admissions, but inviting them to sue within 14 days else you'll refer any further threatening letters to the police as harrassment.
STRAMASHER
05-02-09, 02:12 PM
Appreciate all the replies folks.
New Leaf
05-02-09, 02:14 PM
so if he goes to court - and the court decides that the signs were adequate - then he has to pay the £60, plus any thing the debt collection agency adds on top, plus the court issue fee and expenses etc.
I think it stinks. Its just wrong that debt collection agencies can add extra fees on whilst there is still disagreement as to wether the charge is valid or not in the first place. They should have to go to court and get a ruling as to wether the charge is valid before the dept collection agency can start adding charges willy nilly.
so if he goes to court - and the court decides that the signs were adequate - then he has to pay the £60, plus any thing the debt collection agency adds on top, plus the court issue fee and expenses etc.
I think it stinks. Its just wrong that debt collection agencies can add extra fees on whilst there is still disagreement as to wether the charge is valid or not in the first place. They should have to go to court and get a ruling as to wether the charge is valid before the dept collection agency can start adding charges willy nilly.
No not nec. The £60 is almost certainly a penalty - where's the genuine pre-estiimate of reasonable loss?
And the debt collection stuff - does the contract entitle these? And at what rate? Can attack these as unreasonable and penalties also.
Mum got a parking 'ticket' from a private company for allegedly parking in front of a loading bay- for £94. I was writing letters for her, asking for proof etc, they wouldn't give any proof, only "Your vehicle was parked in front of a loading bay and this is strictly prohibited, pay your fine by the 16/2/2009 or we will take you to court"... Dad sent them a cheque yesterday. :(
Mum got a parking 'ticket' from a private company for allegedly parking in front of a loading bay- for £94. I was writing letters for her, asking for proof etc, they wouldn't give any proof, only "Your vehicle was parked in front of a loading bay and this is strictly prohibited, pay your fine by the 16/2/2009 or we will take you to court"... Dad sent them a cheque yesterday. :(
Oh dear. +1 to these rip off merchants.
Flamin_Squirrel
05-02-09, 07:01 PM
Mum got a parking 'ticket' from a private company for allegedly parking in front of a loading bay- for £94. I was writing letters for her, asking for proof etc, they wouldn't give any proof, only "Your vehicle was parked in front of a loading bay and this is strictly prohibited, pay your fine by the 16/2/2009 or we will take you to court"... Dad sent them a cheque yesterday. :(
Cancel it!
He won't, I already tried to stop him sending it but he wouldn't be talked out. He reasoned that it's much better to pay that extortionate sum than to have the hassle of a debt agency, court etc. I wouldn't have paid.
Cancel it!
No you can't! If you issue a cheque that is a promise to pay, therefore they would be able to sue you to enforce collection of the cheque if it bounced.
Ed is this correct? & thanks for your very full previous reply :D hope Stramsher found it useful.
Sean have you shown your Dad Ed's reply?
Yep. It's a bit late now, he's given in. :(
No you can't! If you issue a cheque that is a promise to pay, therefore they would be able to sue you to enforce collection of the cheque if it bounced.
Ed is this correct? & thanks for your very full previous reply :D hope Stramsher found it useful.
Yes it is. A cheque is a promise to pay and if you stop it or if it's otherwise unpaid you can be sued on the cheque.
Flamin_Squirrel
06-02-09, 10:31 AM
Ooh, learn something every day.
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.